Global warming - a few reasons you might want to be concerned

Ahhh... another link you did not read first. Gas and vapor are not two different things. Simply put, a vapor is a gas that has a temperature lower than its boiling point. Example... the water vapor (gas) in the atmosphere.

 

AA reminds me of a chap I had an argument with on another forum that carried on for about 3 years.
The guy swore blind that he learned to spell forty with a U in 60s Canada and that forty was an Americanisation, invented by Noah Webster.

I produced all sorts of proof that 40 had been spelled forty for between two to four hundred years or more, including some excerpts from the King James Bible of 1611, but he never budged, even when a couple of other posters told him he was wrong.

 

This says nothing at all about causality and that is the AGW question. If you were to explore the data, you'd most likely find many things that have gone up along with CO2 and temperatures. For examples: population, total income, the cost of US postage, total wheat (and corn, soy bean, etc) bushels.

This statement has so many holes it's difficult to fill them!

1. You seem to be forgetting previous warm periods where temperatures were as warm or warmer than today: Minoan, Roman, and Medieval when CO2 levels were very low.
2. You seem to be completely ignoring any possibility that the sun plays a role in earth's temperatures.
3. The graph below shows CO2 and temperatures since the 1950s. I don't see a strong cause and effect between the two.



AboveAlpha[/QUOTE]

Questions are in Post #96.

 

I am going to clear up a few things on this post.

#1. Water Vapor and the difference between a VAPOR and a GAS.

Now in Earth's Atmosphere Water can exists as a Solid....ICE....Liquid Water....or in 2 forms of a Water Vapor.

One form is Steam or Fog....as this is tiny water droplets suspended in air and this liquid water droplets are large enough to make air look cloudy or smokey.

Another form of Water Vapor is when H20 Molecules are suspended in Air but you this water vapor is clear and the water suspended within the Air and all the various gases that make up air such as Oxygen, Nitrogen, CO2, CH4...etc.

Now this next statement is a FACT....in Earth's Atmosphere Water Vapor CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT AIR.

If there was no air...which in Earth's Atmosphere is many Gases of which Nitrogen Gas N2 of over 78%, Oxygen Gas O2 at about 21% and the rest being CO2, CH4, Ar, Ne, Kr, N2O, H2 and O3 comprising AIR.....and if Air did not exist WATER VAPOR as well could not exist.

Water Vapor is simply tiny droplets of water suspended in Air and in clear invisible water vapor known as an AQUEOUS VAPOR.....in Earth's Atmospheric Pressure and Altitude just prior to the temps.causing such water to freeze and turn into tiny crystalline solid forms which suspended in air are known as CLOUDS the H2O Molecules in liquid water vapor will usually exist as 2H2O and above in their smallest form in Atmosphere above freezing temps.

Water can exist as single H20 Molecules in extremely low pressures not found in Earth's atmosphere and this might lead some to believe this means H2O can exist as a TRUE GAS....as Water Vapor is NOT H2O as a true gas as as a Vapor water will exist in SATURATION AND SUSPENSION with other gases that make up air thus no air...NO WATER VAPOR....as Water Vapor is a combination of Water Molecules and all the gases that make up AIR.

But as far as H2O existing as a TRUE GAS...that meaning existing in a quantity of single individual H20 Molecules unbounded such as 2H20 which is the smallest amount of water that can exist separate within an invisible Water Vapor Form.....just individual H20 Molecules can either exist for a split second exiting a tea pot as steam and intermixing with air but they will soon bond with other 2H20 double Molecules of air.

Individual H20 Molecules can be created placing liquid water in a NASA vacuum chamber and opening the lid on a container of water as the liquid water will boil off due to the vacuum and then attach itself as individual H20 Atoms to the surrounding chamber but H20 WILL NOT free float as a gas.

#2. Since INVISIBLE WATER VAPOR is a COMBINATION of 2H20 and all the Gases that make up air INCLUDING Ch4 and CO2....and water vapor could not even exist as a vapor without air....and since several Green House Gases such as CO2 and CH4 exist as a part of Water Vapor...it is INSANE to not be able to understand that the REASON WATER VAPOR is able to hold in heat in our atmosphere is because the H2O in water vapor along with Co2,Ch4...etc....all Solar Radiation to heat up such various Gases saturated with water to a greater extent than is possible without water being present.

AboveAlpha

 

What if you put water in a closed container without the air gasses like nitrogen? Then you heat up the container. Are you telling me there won't be any water vapor?

 

Impossible, until you decide to agree with every science institute on planet Earth.

 

How about wages, for straw men and salaries, for insane ramble-monkeys?

What fabulous narcissism.

AGW is interfering, with re-glaciation, relative, to the usual cooling, which SHOULD BE but IS NOT HAPPENING:

Look! Our Earth's Milankovitch activity, for the Holocene has run its course, and we should be but ARE NOT COOLING!

Look and see:



I guess that red line, over on the right explains why climate masses are warming AND surface temps are about to go up, even though radiance is down!

But that presumes an observer of data must have an educated mind, at least to some reasonable level.

OK, so how about this? Here are CO2 and temp plots, for YOUR favorite epoch, which you neglected, to properly explain, the Holocene:



CO2 leads temps, OK?

So when ALL CLIMATE AFFECTED MASSES GET GOOD AND READY, up go the surface temp readings . . .

So what, about your lame review, of the Holocene? Once we're in an interglacial period, THEN radiance, etc. can bop things around. So bloody what!

What is meaningful is WE SHOULD BE COOLING, like the cooldown, of 400,000 years ago, not like the little bumps, in your hopeless review, of the Holocene, which is toast, already, SO WE SHOULD BE RE-GLACIATING, BUT WE ARE NOT, AND WE WILL NOT.

Even the most media-deprived should be able to sort these circumstances. But that would leave Gov.Jindal, with less of a challenge, than he is used to.

 

The scale of your charts cannot be read accurately for periods much smaller than about 1500 years. Thus CO2 could have been higher than currently and could have risen faster. But if it happened over a period of less than 500 years and then retreated, it would not show up on your charts.

All of your SHOUTING about MASS EXTINCTION, WE SHOULD BE RE-GLACIATING, BUT WE ARE NOT, AND WE WILL NOT, TODAY'S RISE IN CO2 IS THE FASTEST, EVER, IN GEOLOGIC TIME, jellyfish invasions, etc are not persuasive without data references. BTW - I pointed out that the reference you provided on that last catastrophe did not say anything about CO2. And your drought, storm intensities, fire, etc disagree with the IPCC's AR5 report.

SHOUTING does not make it so.

 

You make the mistake that many warmists make and that is to compare proxy records to temperature readings of the last 100 years. To be accurate, you would have to compare proxy to proxy which may not record any spikes.